Background Checks at the Airport? Or possible security breach?

[Melensdad]

This is of interest to me because I fly a lot for business/pleasure. I'm just curious if there will be a way to abuse this and screw it up some way, or if they have thought out all the security ramifications?

I know it typically takes me less than 10 minutes to get through security at O'Hare in Chicago, but I've often waited 45 mintues to over an hour to get through security at McCarren in Las Vegas. I spent and easy 20 minutes in security in Albuquerque in October. Orlando can take an hour if you get there at the wrong time. West Palm Beach is horrible, almost as bad as Vegas. Miami seems to be pretty good to fly out of.

I'd be willing to go through background checks to get through the entire process faster at every airport. But what would stop a terrorist from submitting a false name, ID that had cleared the background check and forging an ID with his photo on it?

Your thoughts?

TSA to Offer Passengers Plan to Avoid Extra Security Checks

Thursday, November 03, 2005

WASHINGTON — The government wants to offer airline passengers the chance to avoid extra security checks.

The Transportation Security Administration plans to make a "registered traveler" program available nationwide, agency chief Kip Hawley said Thursday in prepared testimony to Congress. No timetable was given.

`"We believe that a nationwide registered traveler program can provide expedited screening for many travelers and enhance aviation security as well," Hawley told the House Homeland Security subcommittee on economic security.

Hawley said the TSA is considering adding benefits to the program, such as letting registered travelers keep their shoes and their jackets on, or setting up special screening lanes.

The government will conduct the background checks but Hawley said the plan is to use private companies to enroll travelers, issue ID cards that would be shown at airports and promote the program.

The registered traveler concept is not embraced by everyone. Some security experts say it's a way for terrorists to find out if they're on government watch lists. The American Civil Liberties Union said it forces passengers to pay for convenience and give the government access to their personal information.

"Those who don't want to give up this information — or who can't afford the costs — will have to deal with other airport screening lines growing exponentially longer," ACLU legislative counsel Timothy Sparapani said. "This isn't a choice any traveler should be forced to make."

The pilot program began more than a year ago at five airports and ended Sept. 30. The program is being continued, though, at Orlando International Airport by a private company, Verified Identity Pass Inc., which is headed by Court TV founder Steven Brill.

Brill told the subcommittee that 10,000 frequent travelers paid $80 each to join the program. Their average wait was 4 seconds, while the average for regular screening lines was 4 minutes, 16 seconds. Perhaps more important, their average maximum wait time was 3 minutes, significantly less than the maximum wait time of 31 minutes, 48 seconds for regular lines.

​

 

[OkeeDon]

"Those who don't want to give up this information — or who can't afford the costs — will have to deal with other airport screening lines growing exponentially longer," ACLU legislative counsel Timothy Sparapani said. "This isn't a choice any traveler should be forced to make."

This is not a logical statement. If the policy is NOT put in place, the ACLU rep is correct -- the traveler won't be forced to make a choice. Instead, ALL travelers will be forced to continue to wait in the lines. How can removing some people from the lines make them "exponentially longer"? Wouldn't forcing all travelers to stay in the lines make them ever longer? Would it help even those travelers who do NOT participate in the program if significant numbers no longer had to go through the long lines? Bah. Why would they be "forced" to choose? The easiest thing in the world would be to stay out of the privileged group if they don't want to submit to a background check; for them, nothing would change, except it might get a little better!

I am not an ACLU lover or hater; I am a lover of logic and common sense no matter who proposes it. Sometimes the ACLU males sense; this time they sure as hell don't.

 

[Dargo]

Well Don, you proved me wrong. I apologize for my thoughts. I figured that you would see a way that the ACLU was right here. I'm sorry. I should have known better. You don't play fair; you like to think for yourself.

Maybe you had me pegged as just the opposite; always disagreeing with them. I'll admit that it seems that I always disagree with their spin, but every so often, they will have one valid point...maybe once every few years or so.

 

[v8dave]

Yep, like I'm going to trust the same crowd that steals from luggage to protect my personal information. I have absolutely no confidence this information would be protected. In the past I've been a 100,000 mile per year flyer and in the been able to stand in shorter lines, paid for by the airlines. It was nice to go to the head of the line. Even for that convenience, I wouldn't pay to allow those [folks] to have access to my personal information.

It's not like I have any private facts unknown by the Government anyway. I've worked in the Defense industry all my life and been poked, prodded and checkout more times that I care to count. But that stuff isn't in a computer accessable in every airport in the USA.

 

[OkeeDon]

Well, near as I can figure out, that's the great thing about this proposal. It's voluntary. If you don't like it, you don't have to do it. Personally, I don't give a rat's patootie what they think they know about me; there's nothing about me that anyone would really care to know, and even less that would do them any good.

 

[dzalphakilo]

I could never figure out the "procedures" of the TSA.

Two and half years ago, my future wife and myself flew out to Vegas to meet my father to do some hiking in Utah.

Whenever I fly to visit an area (particularly for hiking), I always take a sidearm (more stories there on different airports and procedures).

Anyway, my future wife and I have different airlines about the same flight time.

I have dark skin (eastern european) and at the time of our flight, have a full beard, and hate to admit it, but for the most part, look like a "terrorist".

I have a handgun that I need to check at the counter. My wife is at another "counter" about 15 yards down to my left.

To make a long story short, I check in the handgun, no "itemized" search and go right into the flight terminal. My wife on the other hand has to have all of her bags checked, she's "searched" and I beat her to the gate by a good half hour.

Go figure!

 

[frank_f15]

Who knows why they do things as they do? what does your wife look like? mabey she met the rquirement for a terrorist? i am just kidding, i have no clue as to what trips their trigger, sometimes think they just yank people out of line for the hell of it and to justify their being there.

 

[Melensdad]

I have dark skin (eastern european) and at the time of our flight, have a full beard, and hate to admit it, but for the most part, look like a "terrorist".

Shortly after the government resumed flights after 9/11 I was flying for business. I got searched on every leg of my trip. A month later I was flying again. I got searched on every leg of my trip. A month or two later I was flying with my family and again I was pulled out of the lines and searched prior to each flight. This happened to me over and over again for better than a year.

I shaved my beard.

I have not been stopped or searched since.

I guess I honestly did look like a terrorist?

One thing about all this is that I would rather submit to a dozen searches and be delayed because of it than be blown out of the sky because they didn't search people.

 

[dzalphakilo]

One thing about all this is that I would rather submit to a dozen searches and be delayed because of it than be blown out of the sky because they didn't search people.

I agree with you 100%.

Trying not to get into a politcal discussion, I think that U.S citizens take so much for granted in "our freedoms/rights" in our society that somtimes we don't realize how much we take for granted.

 

[Cityboy]

Profiling is a good thing. Middle Eastern muslim males blow airplanes out of the sky, not blue haired grannies.

The ACLU seems to oppose everything that makes sense, kind of like liberalism in general.

 

[Melensdad]

Well I will tell you that my business uses profiling for how we pick our potential customers. I don't blame a cop for using profiling in certain instances. And I still have no problems with the T.S.A. using profiling to do their passenger searches.

BTW I will be flying to Newark, NJ tomorrow morning and then home tomorrow night. I won't complain if they search me. Well if it is a cavity search I probably will be a little upset, but a normal search, no problems from me over that.

 

[v8dave]

Here is how to avoid being searched at the airports.

The name of the game is to be a regular business traveller. Book your flight early (well, at least avoid last day purchases at the airport) and pay by credit card, try to use the same airline(s) and be a member of their frequent flyer program. This keeps you from being flagged as a last minute flyer or infrequent flyer. Failing these will get you stopped at the security gateway because the airline will have coded your boarding pass to be checked. Ever wonder why they check your boarding pass a second time as you go through the metal detector?

When going through security, take off all jewlery, empty your pockets, remove your belt and shoes. Not getting stopped for any check at all will get you through the screening without a search. For women, the jewlery thing and underwire bras will always get them stopped and searched.

I carry little plastic baggies in my computer case and put the contents of my pockets (including my wallet) into the case. I take off my watch and cell phone and put them in there also. Then, standing in line I remove my belt and shoes and send them through. I have not been searched at the security entrance either before or after 911 following these simple procedures.

I was flying heavily before and after 911. Because of the amount of flying I did, I was usually boarding first (First Class) and they randomly picked people from the line to go through a gate search. The search line was short so they picked a lot of first boarders. I learn quick and wasn't in the first 10. Initially after 911, I was searched at least once on every trip (two legs, each direction per trip). The scary part was sitting on the plane and looking at the flight crews. They were scared of the passengers. It seemed to take a month before they would look you in the eye. Flying into and out of Reagan, Washington National airport was a real PITA--extra security, extra rules.

 

[Melensdad]

Just pulled this off Yahoo! News.

It seems to make sense to me.

Air-Travel Screening to Change Dec. 22

By LESLIE MILLER, Associated Press Writer 3 minutes ago


Airline passengers soon will be allowed to take small scissors and screwdrivers aboard planes again, Transportation Security Administration chief Kip Hawley announced Friday.

Hawley said the change will take effect Dec. 22 and is part of a broader effort aimed at having screeners spend more of their time searching for explosives rather than small, sharp objects that don't pose as great a risk. The small implements were banned after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Under the new plan, more passengers will be subjected to secondary screening and pat-downs will include the arms and legs as well as the torso. Passengers also can expect more randomness at security gates so would-be terrorists won't know for sure what they will see.

For example, an airport might require all passengers to remove their shoes one day but not the next. Some passengers may have to show their identification an extra time or have their carry-on bag hand-searched.

"By incorporating unpredictability into our procedures and eliminating low-threat items, we can better focus our efforts on stopping individuals who wish to do us harm," Hawley said.

Among the items no longer prohibited from airliner cabins: scissors 4 inches or less, and tools such as screwdrivers, wrenches and pliers that are smaller than 7 inches. Box-cutters and small knives will remain on the list of banned items.

The White House approved the plan, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said. "We support the decision that they have come to," he said.

But flight attendants and some lawmakers say the changes undermine security.

"I have not spoken to a flight attendant at any airline that isn't outraged by this," said Thom McDaniel, president of Southwest Airlines flight attendants' union, Transport Workers Local 556. "They want to focus more on explosives, but they're not even mentioning that the biggest threat to commercial aviation right now is still the fact that most cargo is not screened."

Reps. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., said Thursday they intend to introduce a bill to preserve the current list of items barred from the cabin.

"The Bush administration proposal is just asking the next Mohamed Atta to move from box cutters to scissors as the weapon that's used in the passenger cabin of planes," Markey said, referring to the leader of the Sept. 11 hijackers.

Justin Green is an attorney for the families of three flight attendants who died aboard American Airlines Flight 11, which hijackers crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City on Sept. 11. Two of the flight attendants, Bobbi Arestegui and Karen Martin, were stabbed by the terrorists. The third, Betty Ong, reported what was happening during the hijacking in a telephone call to authorities on the ground.

"The families are outraged that the TSA is planning on letting weapons back on board," Green said.

Airlines generally support Hawley's plan. So does the pilots' largest union, the Air Line Pilots Association.

Bob Hesselbein, the union's national security committee chairman, said pilots think it's more important to focus on passengers' intent rather than what they're carrying.

"A Swiss army knife in the briefcase of a frequent flyer we know very well is a tool," Hesselbein said. "A ballpoint pen in the hands of a terrorist is a weapon."

TSA screeners this year alone have confiscated 12.6 million prohibited items, including 3 million sharp objects, according to the Homeland Security Department.

They've also taken away 8.1 million lighters, the only item prohibited by law. Congress, concerned that terrorists would have an easier time igniting a bomb with a lighter than with matches, enacted the ban. It took effect April 14.

Rep. John Mica (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla., chairman of the House Transportation Committee's aviation panel, agrees with Hawley that screeners should be looking for explosives rather than small, sharp objects that could be used as weapons.

"You have a huge army of pilots that are now armed, you have significant numbers of federal air marshals, you have secure cockpit doors, you have an alert public," Mica said. "Terrorists aren't dumb, they can see what the weakness in the system is."

​